The Earth is 4.5 billion years old
There is more evidence for the Theory of Evolution than the Theory of Creation
Atheism as a belief system is just as flawed as any other religion that "has the answers"
Anthropogenic pollution is real and is destroying the atmosphere, by 2030 noticeable changes will begin occurring.
Jesus was most likely a real man (or men), but he was only a philosopher and he did not resurrect back from the dead.
Carbon-14 dating of diamonds is flawed due to the age of diamonds being so old that most of the C14 within them has reduced to levels lower than background radiation making C14 dating of extremely old material (such as diamonds) a waste of money. K-Ar dating will make more sense. Likewise for bogus attempts to K-Ar date volcanic material that is less than a few thousand years old. Radioactive decay is well understood and acceptably precise way to judge how old something is.
Dinosaurs were real.
Homo Sapiens has only walked the Earth for roughly 200,000 years.
Good Luck!
>Atheism is a believe system
>Carbon 14
>Diamonds
>>1306407
Atheism is the belief of no god or gods, is this not a belief system?
People have actually attempted to C14 date diamonds and say the Earth is only 6000 years old, i agree it is amateur.
>>1306405
Tippy-tap, I'm tipping my hat.
>>1306411
Atheism is based around not believing in God.
You might consider it a belief, but it´s certainly not a system with rules and stuff.
>>1306405
>>1306420
Actually science education taught me you don't really understand something through memorization alone.
>>1306405
>Daily reminder that the USA is probably the only country in the western world where this is still an issue.
>Daily reminder that all this theist/atheist shitflinging war is an american issue.
>>1306425
It is unfortunate. I don't know why it is this way either.
>>1306405
>calling a belief system 'flawed' if it provides answers
>in an opening post that consists of nothing but answers
Fagnostics I swear
>>1306405
>posting a failed engineer
>>1306425
It's not even an issue outside of backwards shitholes in the South
>>1306405
>Anthropogenic pollution is real and is destroying the atmosphere, by 2030 noticeable changes will begin occurring.
First it was global warming, then it was climate change, by 2030 (when Manhattan is underwater and India is a superpower) it will be atmospheric occurrence
>>1306425
This
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uaz9Ks338c4
>>1307244
>Bill Maher
couldn't you at least search a legitimate source and show the issue in serious tone?
>>1307246
Trash talk is not an argument.
>>1306405
>Atheism as a belief system
Not so fast.
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, performs an action that is contradictory to one or more beliefs, ideas, or values, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.
Modern University summed up:
1. I believe that everything, in a universe that so enormous that it is almost beyond human comprehension, was once compacted to a size smaller then a marble.
2. I do not believe in the idea of the Great Universal Monad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rFwaf2GaHE
>>1307400
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXazEYi3P8
"Theory of Creation". Nigga, pls, creation is self-evident, it doesn't need a theory.
>>1307424
Well of course it's not a a theory.
A theory implies a falsifiable hypothesis, which the "Theory" of creation clearly lacks.
>>1307465
How can you falsify a self-evident truth? That's the point, it's not a theory nor a hypothesis. If I say "the sky is blue", it's not a theory and can't be falsifiable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROe28Ma_tYM
>Philosophy is important for a while, but also you start arguing in a circle. I think, therefore i am, what if you don't think about it? Do you not exist anymore? You probably still exist...
>Just keep in mind if you're spending all this money on college, a philosophy deegre may not lead you on a career path.
>>1306405
Creation is not a theory - it's just a revelation of the fact that the world has been created by an omnipotent Being from nothingness - there are no scientific explanations - there was not an scientific model or tool in the times of Moses neither - if Moses lived today Creation would've surely been influenced at least by scientific language and some concepts. But that's entirely beyond the point.
God in Genesis says He created everything as mature - all animals, all stars and everything else was created in one moment as a whole - already mature.
This means there was no evolution - God configured the animals so to speak and made them simply exist, mature and fully capable of reproduction and other survival tools - except that before man sin - death was not part of animal kingdom either - all animals should've lived eternally alongside humans.
>>1307475
>the sky is blue
But it isn't.
>>1307494
If your "science" can't even tell you the color of the sky, why shuld I believe when it says something about the Universe?
>>1307502
I never said you should.
>>1306415
it only needs one rule to be a belief system
and the one rule of atheism is ultimately based on a leap of faith like any other religious belief
>>1307511
But anon I'm an agnostic.
>>1307475
If I were to look at the sky and it wasn't detectably blue in color that would falsify the hypothesis that the sky is blue because it wouldn't be blue, ignoring statistical significance and the possibility of errors on my part.
Falsification, my dear anon, doesn't mean what you think it means.
If a hypothesis is unfalsifiable then it yields equal results regardless of whether the hypothesis is true or false.
If it is falsifiable then the results can potentially differ.
The sky also isn't always fucking blue.
>>1307506
Of course you said, you know that's the whole point of our discussion. Jesus, you're a fucking moron.
>>1307511
>and the one rule of atheism is ultimately based on a leap of faith like any other religious belief
yes, there really are people this stupid
>>1307515
You can't falsify personal experience. You can't falsify a self-evident truth.
When will you faggots understand science and falsifiability only works for common sense?
>>1307502
ever look at the sky at night?
>>1307550
Everything exists, therefore it was created.
>>1307522
how is it not a leap of faith? you're making an assertion that is based on no evidence
ftr i'm agnostic
>>1307560
Sky is bue is not a theory, I told you a personal experience. If you can't read, that's your problem, not mine.
>>1307562
"Everything" includes God.
>>1307569
God is not a thing, that's the point.
>>1307579
>God is not a thing
So you are arguing God doesn't exist?
>>1307579
Every entity is a thing.
I should not have to explain what the most general meaning of "thing" is.
>>1307562
Doesn't follow. Unless you say "if it exists, i must've been created". In which case, God either doesn't exist or God itself was created. If God exists and wasn't created, then it isn't true that existence requires creation.
It's one of those self-defeating arguments.
>>1307533
>Can't falsify personal experience
Define personal experience. If someone claims with no evidence to have witnessed or intuited something that can't be verified or repeated then that's completely meaningless bullshit anyway. If you can do either of things then sure it can be falsified statistically.
>Can't falsify a self evident truth
Define a self-evident truth. Most of the self-evident truths that can't be falsified (And aren't just straight logic etc) aren't self-evident truths. Creation is clearly not self-evident otherwise I'd believe it and not evolution.
Also common sense is rarely sensible and rarely common. If there were a third word I'd Voltairepost.
Science tries to avoid common sense bullshit with falsifiability since falsifiability provides a way to prove the hypothesis wrong if it is actually wrong.
>>1307562
That's pretty shitty self evidence desu. Just because everything exists doesn't mean it was created or that this creator was god, I don't really claim to know what happened before the big bang even though I do refuse to acknowledge your idea of what happened prior because you can't know either. Moreover this doesn't cover YEC which really was what I thought I was debating since theory of evolution vs theory of creation was the topic of discussion.
>>1307565
Can't prove a negative claim but you can prove or disprove a positive claim, provided you create a falsifiable hypothesis for it. So statistically significant absence of evidence is evidence of statistically significant absence. Basically agnostic in terms of what that describes but I still think I'd describe myself as an atheist.
Says a man in his 20s
Carbon-14 is deceiving because materials can be easily contaminated. Note that example of the young trees that were millions of years old according to carbon measurement because they were near a volcano
Men has had to add more and more years to Earth age simply because evolution don't fit with how advanced civilization is
In this era of telecommunications is ridiculous you aren't aware of true miracles occurring worldwide annual. Check Napoli blood of Saint Geneseo or miracle of Lankiano
>>1307663
*Saint Gennaro
>>1307511
>atheism is ultimately based on a leap of faith like any other religious belief
Faith is more or less a synonym for belief.
I don't need to make a leap of any kind. I can observe the world and conclude that
1. Nothing really points to a god existing. Religions have always begun with people looking at things they don't understand and declaring that a god must be doing it, because that was the best explanation they could come up with.
2. No-one has ever observed a god
3. Most if not all belief systems involving gods have serious problems in logic and internal consistency
You can nitpick all you want, but the general point still stands. You need to be able to provide a positive claim that is falsifiable and then we can look at it, but we always start with the assumption that a god does not exist (a negative claim).
Now to the inevitable argument that will be made, either as bait or not, but it will be made:
>you can't disprove god
God is undisproveable by nature, and as such is always assumed disproven. The reason for this is that you can literally make the same argument about the easter bunny or a monkey that's stuck up your asshole that's completely undetectable through all means. You literally can't disprove that.
>>1306415
It definitely has rules in schools. I say let people believe what they want you do what you want and if you're doing it right people will fallow
>>1307663
>Men has had to add more and more years to Earth age simply because evolution don't fit with how advanced civilization is
See panspermia
>>1306429
Our theists were praticularly fanatical for a developed nation, and the militant Atheism is reactionary.
US theists are hardcore enough to irk people, but not bad enough to scare them into submission.
>>1307243
Y would India b a super power?
>>1307663
I'm struggling to understand where all of these non-arguments come from, a Kent Hovind video?
Are you seriously unaware scientists take contamination of specific sample into account?
How does evolution "fail to fit with how advanced civilization is"?
How about you check out the "miracles" of Sathya Sai Baba. Do you believe in those and in Hanuman the Monkey God or just the "miracles" you want to believe in?
>>1307701
>It definitely has rules in schools.
Examples?
>>1307701
>I say let people believe what they want you do what you want and if you're doing it right people will fallow
Some people believe that they have the right to hurt other people because of their belief system, so limits to what the fuck your religion allows you to do would be nice.
>>1306405
Agree with everything except for Carbon-14 dating because I don't have any knowledge about that.
